Saturday, December 1, 2012

Right-Wing Meme Alert: Susan Rice Dared to Suggest that School Kids Could Learn Something from the Study of Black History Back in 1986

In a 1986 book by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, the future diplomat argued for the aggressive inclusion of a black history curriculum in American schools, claiming that its omission had “crippling effects” by “providing a child with no more than … a white interpretation of reality.”

The 86-page book, “A History Deferred,” served as a guide for secondary and elementary school teachers wanting to teach “Black Studies,” and was published by the Black Student Fund, an advocacy group where Rice had an internship.

“Susan’s interest in the study of Black history evolved from her desire to learn more about the experiences and achievements of her own people,” notes the preface.

The Right's hostility to Ambassador Susan Rice has been described by the Washington Post and others as motivated by white racism. Partisanship, conspiranoid thinking, and an effort to defrock President Obama are most certainly part of the Republicans' hostility to a black woman who would dare to become Secretary of State. In an era where racism and conservatism are one and the same, Republicans cannot resist the urge and impulse to attack a black woman who serves in the Obama administration--even if race-baiting helped to lead to the downfall of their presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

They have not learned from their failures. Facing demographic suicide, conservatives are addicted to the political meth of white racial resentment and anti-black affect. It is one hell of a drug.

The Tea Party GOP's opposition to Susan Rice has found a new fixation. Just as conservatives wanted to find evidence of anti-white vitriol in Michelle Obama's thesis at Princeton, or anti-white sentiment in black liberation theology and Reverend Wright's common sense observations about American history during Obama first presidential campaign, the new meme will be focused on Susan Rice's work as a college student with the Black Student Fund.

In that capacity, she apparently committed a heinous crime according to the Right-wing muckrakers atThe Daily Caller: in 1986, Susan Rice dared to suggest that black kids could benefit from learning that they are not bystanders in American history. To the Right, this is a great crime.

Her offense is also bizarre; Rice supposedly harbors anti-white animus, but somehow she decided to dedicate her life to serving the United States government. Riddle you that one? Maybe she is a Manchurian candidate?

There is nothing in Susan Rice's suggestions from almost twenty years ago, as selectively excised from her longer work (as featured by The Daily Caller) that respected psychologists, social scientists, and others have found disagreement with. Her comments are so basic and obvious that The Daily Caller's white racist histrionics are made all the more apparent.

There Charles Johnson writes:

Central to the book’s ambition was reclaiming lost black achievements and giving black children pride in their history. In that vein, Rice lists black achievements in “Literature,” “the Arts,” “the Music [sic]” and “Public Service” to present an Afrocentric view of U.S. history.This was necessary, Rice noted in her book’s foreword, because most students were “taught American history, literature, art, drama, and music largely from a white, western European perspective. As a result, their grasp of the truth, of reality, is tainted by a myopia of sorts.”“American history cannot be understood fully or evaluated critically without ample study of Black history,” Rice added...

Carson, Rice saw a political component in Black Studies, writing that the “absence or cursory coverage of Black history, literature, and culture reinforces pernicious and pervasive social perceptions of Black Americans.”

And failing to teach Black Studies in school, she argued, had negative consequences for the self-esteem of black children.

“Ultimately, what is more important than the white or majority perception of black Americans is the black man, woman, and child’s perception of themselves,” Rice wrote. “The greatest evil in omitting or misrepresenting Black history, literature, and culture in elementary or secondary education is the unmistakable message it sends to the black child. The message is ‘your history, your culture, your language and your literature are insignificant. And so are you.’"

Political speech is a type of discourse that proceeds from a set of unstated assumptions. For the community which frequents The Daily Caller, their prior is one wherein all black people (except bootblack conservatives) are traitors, untrustworthy, not "real" Americans, and that all events of either significance and importance in the United States (and the world) were created by and for White people.

Students of race and racial ideologies term call this set of attitudes and beliefs "symbolic racism."

In the White Gaze, Black and brown folks are bystanders in human history; smart folks can mock such silliness, but such fictions are taken as the truth for the White Right and the Tea Party GOP. Black people, all of us, everywhere, are also closet radicals who want to get "whitey," and a moment away from attacking our white "hosts."

There are multiple levels of racist, white pathology at work in The Daily Caller's discussion of Susan Rice's work as a young student with the Black Student Fund in 1986.

The comment section is noxious and an ideal typical example of bigotry by the Right, and their basic belief that black and brown folks are not "real" Americans. Moreover, this is a not so subtle demonstration of a disdain for the basic premise that non-whites have anything to offer the American project. As such, for conservatives it is bizarre to think that white children could learn anything about the society in which they live by studying the history of black people in either the Americas or the world.

At times, I am tempted to grumble and complain about the books that my parents, godparents, and teachers gave me in my formative years, and that offered a corrective to the Eurocentric lies that were taught in most public schools. I learned early on that people of color were not bystanders to our own history. I was encouraged to be immediately suspect of "white savior" narratives. Most importantly, I was taught a healthy respect for the Black Freedom Struggle.

Even then, reading the willful lies that made Whiteness and white people central to all events of importance in the United States, and seeing the polite racism masquerading as race neutral disagreement at The Daily Caller and elsewhere, I am troubled.

But, I am not surprised.

I have the armor to resist the mental, psychic, and emotional assaults on people of color brought by the forces of white racism and white supremacy in the Age of Obama. This does not mean that we/us are immune from the blows and/or do not feel impact and vibrations on our metaphorical steel.

As sociologists such as Joe Feagin, Charles Gallagher, and Eduardo Bonilla-Silva have documented, there is a not so small portion of the American public who has learned to be politically correct in their discussions of race and racism. They have learned a script; however, these same people are still racist. Their new weapon is subterfuge: colorblind racists are now adept at masquerading their true feelings.

In private, online, and in the "backstage", what many white folks really think about non-whites is made clear. The former do not like people of color. Yes, America in the post civil rights era is supposedly "post racial". In reality, there are many people who are simultaneously disdainful of black and brown people, and also fervently believe that non-whites have contributed nothing of worth to American society which White people ought to consider valuable or worthy of respect.

As I have said many times, on a basic level the Right's disdain for President Obama is an extension of a pathological disdain for the humanity of black people, specifically, and the Other, more generally. The casualness of the bigotry on display in the comments section of The Daily Caller's essay on Susan Rice's benign suggestion from 1986 that Eurocentrism is pernicious and harmful, is proof of how white racism is immoral, and also damages not just people of color, but white folks too.

Will white opinion leaders in the Republican Party help to free their own voters and public from the poison pill that is white racism? I am unsure.

51 comments:

Her offense is also bizarre; Rice supposedly harbors anti-white animus, but somehow she decided to dedicate her life to serving the United States government. Riddle you that one?

Not much of a riddle there. The fact that she was a history major, leaves federal employment as the ONLY avenue available to her for prospective fame and glory.

Given her paternal unit and the hookups he could offer, it was a slam-dunk given. I ain't mad at her, but let's not pretend that these petty Bouleisms are anything other than what we all know them to be.

CDV, I'm quite certain that the Republican-Tea Party members in all likelihood will not free its own electorate so that they may freely think for themselves. That will be too dangerous of a thing for them to do.

It will not happen because the continued existence and cultivation of racism still lingers for a designed purpose. How else could Whites/Republican/Tea Party members sell the worn image of themselves as demi-gods?

"CDV - in what conceivable manner, form, or fashion, does it profit black folks to vicariously celebrate the celebrity goings on among the petit Boule-geois?"

Look how well it worked with Obama? We may not have got any issues addressed that might benefit the black constituency, but at least the person at the helm is black. And isn't that what we really want? Really. It doesn't matter that their political agenda is at odds with my sense of moral justice and that they do nothing to alleviate the decline of black America; the symbolism is important. These people are assholes, but dammit, their black assholes. Their OUR assholes. And they have as much right to exploitative assholery as any white politian. We must support such people. For the sake of the epidermis.

@Cnu. This is not black star watching. The whole point of the attacks on Rice and the strategy deployed by The Daily Caller is to attack her as a black person. Read the screed about the insult of daring to think that black people actually have literature, art, culture, and philosophy. That includes you and me. So many of Obama's detractors and those obsessed with anti-Obama derangement syndrome are so fixated on hating the man, I mean this for "progressive types" who routinely complain here and elsewhere, they are unable to see how the Right has utter contempt for people of color.

I am not willing to give that a pass.

Re: jobs, she could have done any number of things.

@BS. It is a hell of a drug.

@Nomad. See my above comment to Cnu. Obama derangement syndrome has you again. Read the Daily Caller piece to be reminded of what they really think of people who look like you. I get your desire, however naive, obsessive, willful, determined, fantasy laden, etc. for a "moral" "black superhero president." If Obama were all of those things--despite not being elected--the rank and file Right would still hate him and anyone who looks like him. That too is a social injustice and practical concern you should not avoid.

Not really, she tried management consulting for half a hot minute and failed miserably. There really isn't really a whole lot of "there" there.

Read the screed about the insult of daring to think that black people actually have literature, art, culture, and philosophy. That includes you and me

Nah brah..., that doesn't include me. I have objective means, aims, and measures - and don't really need or benefit very much from any kind of public popularity contest. Literature, art, culture and philosophy are hobby enthusiasms entirely separate from tangible work.

The claim that black people have not produced anything of value is a claim about you Cnu. Obviously, that is not true. But, that is the collective consciousness within which you/me/us are located relative to.

Literature/art/culture/philosophy are the domains of elite patronage, period.

The claim that black people have not produced anything of value is a claim about you Cnu.

You're the ONLY person making that claim with admirable Cobbian inkjet evasiveness.

My claim is very simply that Susan Rice is a run-of-the-mill Boule legacy who brings nothing special to the table, and around whose nomination there has been raised a disproportionate and embarrassing level of racially identified "celebrity worship".

Your bona fides would be better served by close attention to staymad's steady fidelity to po black folk, notwithstanding his pudding-headed compassion for expendable and toxic elements in their midst.

This could be one of those teachable moments for America, if she and more importantly The President of the United State's could give an easily spirited defense of this concept that could actually wake America up out it's slumber of stupidity that is causing our ruin as a nation. But I bet neither of them will and at best will ignore it and at worse claim it as one of those "youthful indiscretions". Seriously we need a president will moral turpitude and courage to stand up to white supremacy instead of coddling it by playing footsie with it under the table

She may be a boule operative for all I know. And this may or may not disqualify her from service.

She may be an agent for forces that you and others find "evil." Again, that is a separate claim.

The Daily Caller explicitly said that there is nothing of merit to be served by studying the contributions, arts, history, letters, etc. of black people. Moreover, by implication there is something questionable, unethical, and anti-white to suggest that we actually have a history.

I am not surprised by how that ilk behaves; I still call it out.

Me and Cobb are not at all alike. He sulks and throws temper tantrums when his exercise in intellectual auto-fellation is called out. I think he is a nice guy in all likelihood. He is overly invested in Whiteness and his own exceptional negro shtick. But, it is apparent that he really does taken video games and poorly written speculative fiction as "history." At first I thought he was kidding; it would seem he is not.

Anyone like Cobb who wants to claim to be intellectually curious, skeptical, smart, and then rejects reading and learning is operating out of pocket, and on those matters renders him or herself a joke.

I ask questions, confess my ignorance, and listen whenever possible. Since you brought him up, why is Cobb in such a mood?

@Im. No doubt about that when you write: "But I bet neither of them will and at best will ignore it and at worse claim it as one of those "youthful indiscretions". "

Obama is a deft dancer who is quick to run away from truth-telling on matters of race. His vaunted Independence Day speech on race was one of the most pernicious and damaging bits of oratory by a public figure--black, brown or otherwise--in many years.

"Your bona fides would be better served by close attention to staymad's steady fidelity to po black folk," LOL! Naw, pal, that's the way you frame, cause u seein thru them little beady CNu eyes. My fidelity is to justice. It seems to be for po folks but that's because the po are the ones most in need of it. They ask for justice and instead get something reserved for justus.

I notice some similarity tween u CNu and CD. When rational arguments fail and you cannot adequately defend the merits of what ever premise you're trying to polish at the momemnt, you quickly slouch into ad hominem. That's a cue that you're out of any thing substantive to say. It's some variation of the formula: "My position is correct because you (nomad, whoever) are an idiot. Non sequitur, my friends; non sequitur. "naive, obsessive, willful, determined, fantasy laden," What? Nothing about untrue?rollinonthefloorlaffinmyblackassoff.Yalls' games is weak. You can't polish a turd.

@Nomad. Do you have an example? You can polish a turd they did it on mythbusters btw :)

My point is that a fixation on Obama as the greatest evil in the known universe is tiresome and obsessive. It washes away substantive differences between him and other candidates, creates a type of tunnel vision and myopia, and lacks precision. As I say, what would you like to see done in this society that is actionable and politically feasible? If you do not see those options, then you need to organize on a micro level community level and effect change there. Obama will never, could never be, and never promised to be the savior in chief of black people, minorities, or the poor. Anyone who drank that Kool Aid deserves what they get.

How can we develop an agenda like any other interest group to get what we want?

The Daily Caller explicitly said that there is nothing of merit to be served by studying the contributions, arts, history, letters, etc. of black people. Moreover, by implication there is something questionable, unethical, and anti-white to suggest that we actually have a history.

lol, well..., that's cause their claim about arts, history and letters is close to where you live.

As for me, I traffick in petabytes of secure virtual machine operation spanning a fleet of many, many thousands of endpoint devices.

I wish some ignant peasant muh-hukkas would fix their mouths to try and say something operationally relevant about the space in which I function.

Interestingly, few if any mainstream commentators have grasped the fact that one-to-one computing in education will be the largest of the large-scale enterprise implementations of one-to-one device administration.

I ask questions, confess my ignorance, and listen whenever possible.

lol, not really...,

Since you brought him up, why is Cobb in such a mood?

Because for the purpose of appealing to a constituent demographic with tangible mainstream market-value he has virtual self-editing requirements similar to you own.

Neither one of you cats is at liberty to speak freely about what you respectively know and understand about the workings of the world.

My fidelity is to justice. It seems to be for po folks but that's because the po are the ones most in need of it. They ask for justice and instead get something reserved for justus.

rotflmbao...,

feminized jiggaboos begging and pleading for justice have CUH-LEARLY not learned the harsh lessons of the Darwinian 20th century in which the terrifying truth of the human situation was made perfectly clear;.

"Justice" is a political luxury up for grabs on a bloody and merciless evolutionary threshing floor. Let me know when you feeble old bishes grow a pair and get ready to come out on the playing field of justice acquistion.

"My point is that a fixation on Obama as the greatest evil in the known universe is tiresome and obsessive."

Now see that's what I mean. Reductio ad absurdumm and then critiquing the the absurdum as if it were the actual position. Greatest evil in the known universe? Do you know how big the universe is? No. Not my position at all. The Obama worship phenomenon has done a lot of harm to black Americans. It's nothing at all to celebrate; especially by those who would shape public opinion. If I see a con man ripping off some member of my family, I will not sit idly by.

I have been watching with amusement the discussion of Abe Lincoln and his falsified reputation as a friend of black people. What I'm trying to say is that the same thing is happening right now with the beatification of the faux-black hero Obama. You and people like you are creating this black populist myth, amply belied by actual governance of the man. "naive, obsessive, willful, determined, fantasy laden," Is how I would describe your mythologizing of Obama. My contrary assessment only seems "fantasy laden" because you have yet to look cleareyed at Obama's record and his stated intentions. Sure, truth and reality tends to look like fantasy from the perspective of someone oblivious to the fantasy world into which he has retreated. Be of good cheer, though. There is hope. Oops. Strike that. Gotta keep you off the hopium. There is possibility of recovery.

@Nomad. I criticize Obama as needed. I am not disappointed because I never had unreasonably high hopes. I do admire the man and his accomplishments, grace, intelligence, and humor. I also admire his lethal streak. He is an apex predator.

Remember, my friends and I--like many others called this out years ago--elect a black man, end all the civil rights talk, further the corporateocracy. Check and mate.

I am not surprised by anything. The man has enough to deal with without black folks, little voices in the wilderness like myself, and others piling on. He is part of a big system and he is doing his best to be the lesser of 2 or 3 or 10 evils. Your role is to be the miner's canary, speaking truth to power, being unrepentant, and ringing the bell. I admire you for that.

I also have other commitments that guide my behavior and commentary. Others can go after Barack, I have his back to the best I am able.

Sometimes that means calling out certain behavior, other times it means coming up with the scripts and frameworks that you will see elsewhere (speaking of which where is my check?), sometimes it involves focusing on one or two targets and coming at them again, and again, and again from different angles. That is my designated role.

We all have a role to play. I have always been transparent and honest about mine.

Susan Rice's mindless support for and participation in a government that feeds weaponry and money into the Israeli regime's oppression and killing of the Palestinian people is inconsistent with her earlier concern for a seriously flawed American early education system. Giving children censored, skewed lessons in history is unacceptable, but isn't the wanton killing of Palestinian civilians and the brutal theft of their land an even greater offense?

I can have no respect for anyone who does not find our own government's support of Netanyahu and his mis-named IDF totally unacceptable.

Discussion of justice is important, but it must be remembered that there are at least two justices. Justice as it is ("Justice One"), and justice as we wish it to be ("Justice Two").

Nomad seems to be referring to Justice Two, and I fully agree that it is something to which we should aspire. CNu seems to be referring to Justice One, which I fully agree is a horrible, frightening joke.

I believe that what both CNu and Nomad are trying to articulate, though from two different angles, is what I will call the W.E.B. Du Bois inspired "triple consciousness" syndrome; the third component being a relatively new phenomenon, which consist of both the self-conscious black viewing themselves through the negativing white gaze and at the same time as we want to see ourselves; yet we are further striated by our maternalistic impulse to defend another black person (of whom black folk in genereal worship) who too is under attack by the white gaze but who shows absolutely no discernible affinity for black and poor folk...takes them for granted and actually takes measures that do them harm...and those same harmed black folk pathologically turn on other blacks who criticize the protectd-offending black.

This triple consciousness can lead to the critical setback of several generations of Blacks because of the Ayn Randian philosophy being branded by such a powerful figure at such a momentous time.

I understand why CD cannot go where that reality leads. However, it is a significant factor in popular culture...is it not?

@CNUt, the Great Spinner! I wholeheartedly encourage you to join the O'Reilly Factor at Fox News so that you may queue you racist chirps on demand. At least then you'll paid for doing so. Oh, by the way, keep those adorning your worn blinders, it is obvious that you're divorced from reality, very much like the clowns at Murdoch's News Network.

"The man has enough to deal with without black folks, little voices in the wilderness like myself, and others piling on."

Not at all. Is that what you thinking I'm encouraging. Piling on? No indeed. Voices like yours are important. How's a brother ever going to hear your desires and what you have to say if you never speak up. Pile on? Heck no! Offer the brother some sage advice. Tell him, "Quiet as a cap, dude, you heading in the wrong direction." If your chauffer is driving you straight off a cliff, its your duty to tell him so. So what if he got other people yapping at him. "Listen up, buddy! I put you there. I have a right to demand that you represent me." You got a forum and you ain't doing that? That's kind of a shame. Critique the brother with love if you have to, but critique him. He's in great need of it.

Susan Rice's mindless support for and participation in a government that feeds weaponry and money into the Israeli regime's oppression and killing of the Palestinian people is inconsistent with her earlier concern for a seriously flawed American early education system.

Mme Rice's support for Israel is hardly mindless. As the U.S. garrison state in the middle east, and, with the disproportionate influence zionist Jews in American politics, politically speaking at least, she has little choice but go along with the pre-scripted portions of the program allocated to her sphere.

Glenn Ford goes hard and deep on Mme Rice and longterm negroe 1% skullduggery on the African continent. Ford describes Susan Rice as some one who is more hawkish and ‘thuggish’ then Condoleezza Rice who served under George Bush. He notes its an act of betrayal for Black leadership to back her nomination in lieu of her track record. Ford notes many have reacted to in such a way that perceived racial comments are more important to push back on than the genocide of millions of people in Africa on Rice’s watch. You can peep the interview by clicking the link at the beginning of this article

Something IS very, very wrong with a black political class that racially instigates emotional, low-information negroes into reflexively defending the "good name" of Susan Rice, when Mme. Rice is center stage as a provocateur and profiteer in the long term villainy being perpetrated by the American empire on the African continent.

@Cnu. As I said, if you find no offense in the suggestion that black people have no history worth teaching, and the very premise that we do is anti-white, then that is your choice.

We have discussed this. I do not see such beliefs as separable from the "villainy" you have identified. My commitments are stated--I am not going to pile on Obama. Others can play that role. I just hope they are as critical of the white right herrenvolk nonsense as they are what they see as deficiencies in Obama's rule.

Re: Political zionism. Israel is a net strategy liability for the U.S. at this point and should be let to stand on its more than capable two feet.

Re: Africa. The United States should pursue a foreign policy that maximizes its interests. Now, we can certainly debate the "who" and "interests" in a foreign policy that serves the 1 percent. But in the grand game, Africa has resources that must be secured against China. No biggie or great surprise there. Moreover, to not secure African resources would be irresponsible.

@Nomad. All voices are important. You can choose to fixate on Obama as the source of all evil in the world and then miss out on the bigger picture. I choose to focus elsewhere. We all have a role to play.

As I said, if you find no offense in the suggestion that black people have no history worth teaching, and the very premise that we do is anti-white, then that is your choice.

In direct proportion to your pretend inability to find offense in this negroe 1%'s complicity in African genocides.

(frankly, the latter tangible holocausts would appear to trump the tattered racial fig leaf you continue to wave like a cheerleader/matador - long past her glory)

Re: Political zionism. Israel is a net strategy liability for the U.S. at this point and should be let to stand on its more than capable two feet.

It must be more fashionable and permissible at this moment in time to pile-on the clumsy zionist thuggery of Netanyahu, than the better concealed murderousness of Rice/Obama on the African continent?

Re: Africa. The United States should pursue a foreign policy that maximizes its interests. Now, we can certainly debate the "who" and "interests" in a foreign policy that serves the 1 percent. But in the grand game, Africa has resources that must be secured against China. No biggie or great surprise there. Moreover, to not secure African resources would be irresponsible.

My posture regarding US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, is a stance of confliction. On one hand, I’m all for supporting principled and honest Black politicians. Neither one of these is akin to her as a characteristic. However, on the other hand, I refuse to presuppositionally advocate support for an individual simply due to his or her skin hue. If skin tone is all it takes to garner the African-American’s electorate support for a particular politician, we may as well approach voting booths fully blind folded. And subsequently, vote for a neo-Hitler type so long as he’s fully draped in Black face. Even further, it’s no difference if we as a group were to see the world only from a peripherally obscured angle when Black politicians (like halfrican Obama) turn their backs to the plight of Blacks within these United States of Empire than those Blacks abroad, ten-thousand miles away. If there is any thing I’m certain about regarding Susan Rice, it’s that I’m quite certain that she is in fact a disgrace to herself and Blacks here at home.

Granted, the Repubmafia types like Sen. Graham and Sen. McCain of course are grandstanding and jostling for position to see who could paint her in the most unflattering manner and thereby, sabotage her quest for being the next Secretary of this United Empire. Yet, nothing is said by these two apparatchiks about Rice’s dismal performance as the Empire’s Ambassador to the UN. But these patented Repubmafia types are creating a bunch of chatter regarding her selection as Secretary merely due to her skin tone. To them, the act of genocide isn’t important enough to be uttered by them. Yes, these silly and racist Senators are attacking her due to her skin tone as opposed to crippling her chances on her own dreadful Ambassadorship record. They’re too fixated on her skin color.

As it stands right now, the African continent is about to suffer another genocidal incident. Rwandan and Ugandan military forces are not only perched at the doorsteps, but they’ve captured the city of 1 million, Goma. All of this in a murderous attempt to conquer in the name of mineral resources. Susan Rice refuses to use her authority to put a stop to the United Empire’s shuffling of weaponry to Rwandan and Ugandan forces and their encroachment in preparation of performing another slaughtering bonanza on the African continent.

When Bill Clinton was Pres. of the United Empire, he also turned his back in the midst of the killings in the Rwanda in 1994 when over 800,000 Rwandans were killed in less than 100 days. Since then, he stated within his apology speech to Rwandans at Kigali Airport : "We come here today partly in recognition of the fact that we in the United States and the world community did not do as much as we could have and should have done to try to limit what occurred in Rwanda.”

In any event, it appears at this point that Susan Rice will eventually make quite a similar speech within a few years after leaving office as the Empire’s Secretary of State.

The 2012 version of Susan Rice is far removed from the person interested in the study of Black history.

Ambassador Rice, following in the footsteps of Gen. Colin Powell, and Dr. Condoleezza Rice, deliberately misled the American public on the Benghazi attack to achieve political objectives. Gen. Powell and Dr. Condi Rice were excoriated by liberals for their role in articulating propaganda to support the invasion of Iraq.

I'm not comparing the scope of these events, only the actions of the participants.

Dr. Susan Rice (Ph.D, Oxford) is being lambasted by conservatives for articulating propaganda which supported President Obama’s narrative on Libya and al-Qaeda during the election cycle. All three sacrificed truth on an altar of self-interest. The fact that Ambassador Rice is being criticized by political conservatives gives no reason for her to be supported by people who demand truth and justice.

From a Pan-Afrikan perspective Ambassador Rice is probably more deserving of our opposition than either Gen. Powell or Dr. Condi Rice. For starters there is her sordid history of support for Rwanda’s Paul Kagame which dates to at least 1994 when she served in the Clinton Administration. For the latest see:

http://bit.ly/WD6G2r

Then we have her role in the US/NATO war of aggression on Libya.

[The Washington Post reports that a troika of female advisers--Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power--are, by and large, responsible for persuading President Obama-- against the advice of Robert Gates and other members of the military establishment--that bombing Libya is a good idea.]

The Libyan War unleashed racist forces who have lynched, raped, tortured, and indefinitely detained Black people in Libya, particularly the Tawerghans. The real issue here is Ambassador Rice’s role in the Obama Administration’s foreign policy fiasco in Libya.

Suggested title for her next book: "How I Helped to Advance US Imperialism in Africa," by Dr. Susan Rice

@MB. I am legitimately curious. Why would you expect any politician to tell you the truth? Why would a sec'y of state or any high level bureaucrat not stick to script? Why would you expect anything other than that? I am legitimately curious, perhaps this is the source of my confusion about these matters. Are there any presidents, cabinet level officers, or the like who told the truth when it would work against the stated policy goals of their administration? Isn't that part of the job?

"Are there any presidents, cabinet level officers, or the like who told the truth when it would work against the stated policy goals of their administration? Isn't that part of the job?"

It certainly seems to be the way they see their jobs. That makes the jobs of pundits to decipher their lies and present their audience with the agenda the politician is hiding from the public. Not cheerlead the deception.

"Nomad I am also tired of your one trick pony campaign against Obama as well.... It is stale as CD's banning of my posts because I refuse to genuflect to his tired tropes..." Yeah, it is getting old i'nit? That's why I'm changing up. Now I only criticize those who don't criticize Obama. They're the real problem.

@CDV… Exposing lies is not tantamount to expecting the truth. After all I am the originator of this statement: “American politics is the science of deception.”

Overwhelmingly, politicians are the people written about in John 8:44: “The father you spring from is the devil and willingly you carry out his wishes. He brought death to man from the beginning and has never based himself on truth; the truth is not in him. Lying speech is his native tongue. He is a liar and the father of lies.”

“Are there any presidents, cabinet level officers, or the like who told the truth when it would work against the stated policy goals of their administration?” --CDV

One sterling exception comes to mind, former Attorney General Elliot Richardson.

“Richardson was summoned to the White House on Saturday 20 October 1973 and instructed to dismiss Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. The Special Prosecutor was seeking the release of secret White House tape recordings of conversations in the Oval Office.

Richardson refused to dismiss Cox and resigned on the spot. His deputy, William Ruckelshaus, also refused to carry out the order and was fired. Eventually, Cox was dismissed by Robert Bork.

The Saturday Night Massacre became a crucial turning point in the Watergate scandal. It turned public and press opinion against Nixon. Three days later Nixon released some tape recordings, one of which was found to have an 18 and a half minute gap on it.

Richardson’s stand on that night ranks as one of the great assertions of the independence of the judiciary and the sanctity of the separation of powers.”

Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and Susan Rice could have chosen the high moral ground like Elliott Richardson. Instead, they chose to “sacrifice truth on an altar of self-interest.” That's the basic nature of the political beast.

"The real issue here is Ambassador Rice’s role in the Obama Administration’s foreign policy fiasco in Libya.

Suggested title for her next book: "How I Helped to Advance US Imperialism in Africa," by Dr. Susan Rice"

I *am* sort of disappointed that we never gave the Rape of Libya the detailed discussion it deserved. Lots of decades-old layers there, especially in the demonization of Brother Q, whose Green Book was not the deranged drivel it was made out to be.

And, Jeezis... does the Kapo Klass of Negro *have* to come exclusively from light-skinned types, these days? I miss the Jesse Jackson era, when a Gubmint Shill could be a darker-skinned Brother or Sister. Equal opportunity psychopathology!

I thought Vernon Jordan had the monopoly franchise on midnight blue 1% negroes, and you know the very first thing out of Vernon's mouth at all times and in all places is WHERE THE WHITE WIMMIN AT?!?!?!

VJ was born in '35, so A) he predates even *Jesse* and B) if I'd been born in '35, I'd consider the right to diddle (or even share a sidewalk with) kootchie-blanc fairly miraculous, too! Don't underestimate the mercantile genius of making a product so exclusive that someone's ass could die just touching it! laugh

Tips and Support Are Always Welcome

Who is Chauncey DeVega?

I have been a guest on the BBC, National Public Radio, Ring of Fire Radio, Ed Schultz, Sirius XM's Make it Plain, Joshua Holland's Alternet Radio Hour, the Thom Hartmann radio show, the Burt Cohen show, and Our Common Ground.

I have also been interviewed on the RT Network and Free Speech TV.

I am a contributing writer for Salon and Alternet.

My writing has also been featured by Newsweek, The New York Daily News, Raw Story, The Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos.

My work has also been referenced by MSNBC, The Washington Post, USA Today, The Atlantic, The Christian Science Monitor, the Associated Press, Chicago Sun-Times, Raw Story, The Washington Spectator, Media Matters, The Gothamist, Fader, XOJane, The National Memo, The Root, Detroit Free Press, San Diego Free Press, the Global Post, The Lost Angeles Blade as well as online magazines and publications such as Slate, The Week, The New Republic, Buzzfeed, Counterpunch, Truth-Out, Pacific Standard, Common Dreams, The Daily Beast, The Washington Times, The Nation, RogerEbert.com, Ebony, and The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Fox News, Breitbart, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Juan Williams, Herman Cain, Alex Jones, World Net Daily, Twitchy, the Free Republic, the National Review, NewsBusters, the Media Research Council, Project 21, and Weasel Zippers have made it known that they do not like me very much.